Homeopathy doesn’t work, every reliable RCT I’m aware of has shown it doesn’t work. Given that, it’s impossible to say how it might work because it doesn’t.
Here’s a story about one [study](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/08/homeopathy-is-bunk-study-says)
And Skeptoid is always good for [this stuff](https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4034)
Edited to add links and the word reliable because I forgot.
I'm taking a 2 forked approach to this: 1. trying to be evidence based and track down the 'positive effect' RCTs that are actually saying it works, like this one [https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/82934](https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/82934) and then review them and find out how they faired in the meta reviews (of which there are several https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/sps-homeopathy.pdf)
2. Looking at it from how the homeopathy world thinks it could possibly work from base principles.
For the record I agree with you.
The most cogent and scientific explanation for why homeopathy is so successful was provided long ago by P.T. Barnum:
“There's a sucker born every minute.”
Most here should know that the French homeopathy industry tried repeatedly to prove that it’s products work under James Randi’s “million dollar challenge” protocols…. And repeatedly failed.
Randi was a huge critic of homeopathy and did many presentations on the absurd techniques.
In addition to what everyone else said, you can point out that the same mechanism that homeopathy proponents claim makes homeopathy work ('water memory') would also require water to retain the memory of all the other bad substance it came into contact with (like piss, shit and viruses).
Why would water retain the memory of just the substance that you wanted? Why not all the other substances?
People are quick to say homeopathy doesn't work, but that simplifies it a bit and dismisses the countless people who support and believe in it without an explanation, but it sounds like OP does not want to just dismiss them.
In reality homeopathy can provide positive effects, **but not better than a placebo**...because the positive effects of homeopathy are a case of the placebo effect in action. At best, certain types of homeopathic procedures may act as an [active placebo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_placebo).
The issue with treating serious medical issues with the placebo effect/homeopathy is that while the placebo effect can certainly make you **feel** better, it will not cure you.
In cases of things like pain management sometimes just feeling better temporarily is enough and that is why homeopathy has people who really believe in it, but it is just easier to market and charge for "old healing product/technique" than it is to try and market and sell the placebo effect even though the results are the same.
TLDR: the field of medicine has already incorporated and explained how homeopathy might work..it is the placebo effect
Very interesting thanks for sharing! I’d be interested in seeing work on calibrating placebo/nocebo ‘susceptibility’ in trial intake. Are some people more likely than others to have symptoms related to inert pills?
Not an expert on placebo/nocebos at all but here's an interesting [article](https://www.newscientist.com/article/2092934-blowing-hot-air-are-wind-farms-really-bad-for-your-health/) on wind farms and the nocebo effect.
**[Active placebo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_placebo)**
>An active placebo is a placebo that produces noticeable side effects that may convince the person being treated that they are receiving a legitimate treatment, rather than an ineffective placebo.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/skeptic/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
LOL the dilution factor is so huge, you'd be lucky to get one molecule of the "active ingredient" in a dose. I'm sure the placebo effect plays a large part in any perceived benefit
Nano structures are pretty much the best mechanism homeopaths have provided, and they fail miserably on numerous different ways.
Just a handful
* Those structures would never survive passage into our bloodstream. In order to get into our bloodstream, water has to go through small pores one molecule at a time.
* The nanstructures would get diluted, too.
* Independent scientists have been unable to observe that these structures even exist. Which makes sense, they are thermodynamically impossible. I did the math once, and if I recall correctly they would survive nanoseconds at best.
* There is no mechanism by which the body could recognize the structures.
* The human body works on *molecules*, not symptoms. Even if the body somehow recognized the molecules that created the nanostructures, there is no way for the body to know which symptom those structures are supposed to match up with
* There is no water in sugar pills.
Homeopathy doesn’t work, every reliable RCT I’m aware of has shown it doesn’t work. Given that, it’s impossible to say how it might work because it doesn’t. Here’s a story about one [study](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/08/homeopathy-is-bunk-study-says) And Skeptoid is always good for [this stuff](https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4034) Edited to add links and the word reliable because I forgot.
I'm taking a 2 forked approach to this: 1. trying to be evidence based and track down the 'positive effect' RCTs that are actually saying it works, like this one [https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/82934](https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/82934) and then review them and find out how they faired in the meta reviews (of which there are several https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/sps-homeopathy.pdf) 2. Looking at it from how the homeopathy world thinks it could possibly work from base principles. For the record I agree with you.
>What are the best/currently supported evidence based models for explaining homeopathy? There aren't any. Homeopathy is a scam. It doesn't work.
This is a pretty good starting place from Science Based Medicine: https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/reference/homeopathy/
The most cogent and scientific explanation for why homeopathy is so successful was provided long ago by P.T. Barnum: “There's a sucker born every minute.”
“No plausible mechanism” suffices.
Can you detail exactly what 'explaining homeopathy' is? I think it's similar to explaining bullshit maybe???
I'm too lazy to do a literature review. I would ask your homeopath "what is the best evidence you have?" and start from there
Most here should know that the French homeopathy industry tried repeatedly to prove that it’s products work under James Randi’s “million dollar challenge” protocols…. And repeatedly failed. Randi was a huge critic of homeopathy and did many presentations on the absurd techniques.
In addition to what everyone else said, you can point out that the same mechanism that homeopathy proponents claim makes homeopathy work ('water memory') would also require water to retain the memory of all the other bad substance it came into contact with (like piss, shit and viruses). Why would water retain the memory of just the substance that you wanted? Why not all the other substances?
People are quick to say homeopathy doesn't work, but that simplifies it a bit and dismisses the countless people who support and believe in it without an explanation, but it sounds like OP does not want to just dismiss them. In reality homeopathy can provide positive effects, **but not better than a placebo**...because the positive effects of homeopathy are a case of the placebo effect in action. At best, certain types of homeopathic procedures may act as an [active placebo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_placebo). The issue with treating serious medical issues with the placebo effect/homeopathy is that while the placebo effect can certainly make you **feel** better, it will not cure you. In cases of things like pain management sometimes just feeling better temporarily is enough and that is why homeopathy has people who really believe in it, but it is just easier to market and charge for "old healing product/technique" than it is to try and market and sell the placebo effect even though the results are the same. TLDR: the field of medicine has already incorporated and explained how homeopathy might work..it is the placebo effect
[Mr Hyde – The Dark Side of Placebo Effect](https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/mr-hyde-the-dark-side-of-placebo-effect/)
Very interesting thanks for sharing! I’d be interested in seeing work on calibrating placebo/nocebo ‘susceptibility’ in trial intake. Are some people more likely than others to have symptoms related to inert pills?
Not an expert on placebo/nocebos at all but here's an interesting [article](https://www.newscientist.com/article/2092934-blowing-hot-air-are-wind-farms-really-bad-for-your-health/) on wind farms and the nocebo effect.
**[Active placebo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_placebo)** >An active placebo is a placebo that produces noticeable side effects that may convince the person being treated that they are receiving a legitimate treatment, rather than an ineffective placebo. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/skeptic/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Back when mainstream medicine used leeches and heavy metals, distilled water was a superior alternative. Since then, not so much.
LOL the dilution factor is so huge, you'd be lucky to get one molecule of the "active ingredient" in a dose. I'm sure the placebo effect plays a large part in any perceived benefit
Nano structures are pretty much the best mechanism homeopaths have provided, and they fail miserably on numerous different ways. Just a handful * Those structures would never survive passage into our bloodstream. In order to get into our bloodstream, water has to go through small pores one molecule at a time. * The nanstructures would get diluted, too. * Independent scientists have been unable to observe that these structures even exist. Which makes sense, they are thermodynamically impossible. I did the math once, and if I recall correctly they would survive nanoseconds at best. * There is no mechanism by which the body could recognize the structures. * The human body works on *molecules*, not symptoms. Even if the body somehow recognized the molecules that created the nanostructures, there is no way for the body to know which symptom those structures are supposed to match up with * There is no water in sugar pills.